The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Abdullah bristles as Palestine fizzles > Comments

Abdullah bristles as Palestine fizzles : Comments

By David Singer, published 15/2/2010

Jordan’s King Abdullah must show leadership and negotiate with Israel on the sovereignty of the West Bank.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. All
#Mikk

In reply to your post

1. "It is irrelevant to [Singer] what the Palestinians want."

What they want was attainable between 1948-1967 but no longer possible in 2010. There has to be another solution.

2."The King of Jordan is right and eminently sensible. Why would anyone want to take on the mantle of oppressor in place of the Israelis."

Because the West Bank was part of Jordan between 1948-1967 and the West Bank Arabs were Jordanian citizens until 1988. West Bank Arabs will again become Jordanian citizens and be liberated - not oppressed - by Jordan.

3. " Everyone can see the obvious solution but you Israelis wont countenance it because of your Zionist ideology that says all of "Samaria and Judea" belongs to the Jews. You wont stop till you have ethnically cleansed the current inhabitants or worse still commit genocide upon them. "

My proposal calls for sovereignty in the major part of "Samaria and Judea" to be ceded to Jordan and for not one Arab or Jew to leave his current home.

No ethnic cleansing, no genocide.

4. "It is illuminating that Mr Singer brings up so called Jordanian responsibilities under the League of Nations mandate but never suggests Israel might abide by them as well and return to the borders laid out at the time."

The borders laid out under the Mandate provided for the Jewish National Home to be reconstituted in the land west of the Jordan River which includes the West Bank and Gaza and today's Israel.

Jews lived in the West Bank and Gaza prior to 1948 pursuant to the Mandate until they were then driven out by the invading Arab armies from Jordan and Egypt who occupied the West Bank and Gaza until 1967.

5. "Funny how it is only Jordan who is subject to this reasoning by Mr singer and never a mention of Israel let alone it honouring any of the agreements made in the 40s and 50s."

What agreements are you referring to?

Mikk - try and stick to discussing the message, not shooting the messenger.
Posted by david singer, Monday, 15 February 2010 9:28:55 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
A few observations and comments:

--There may or may not have been a Palestinian people prior to 1967. There is one now.

--King Abdullah is not be the sharpest intellect in the Middle-East but he's smart enough to avoid any action that will make the Palestinians his problem. From his perspective Jordan is well rid of its Palestinians. Singer's suggestion that Jordan re-incorporate the West Bank and re-instate the Jordanian citizenship of the Palestinians is the stuff of fantasy. One wonders what Singer has been smoking.

I think it equally unlikely that Egypt would ever re-incorporate the Gaza Strip or offer Egyptian citizenship to its inhabitants.

--Short of irresistible coercion no Israeli Government will ever agree to anything that, in its judgement, would endanger the Jewish nature of Israel. Specifically no Israeli government will agree to a "right of return" to Israel of those who fled in 1948 and their descendants.

--No Palestinian leader will ever foreswear the claim to a "right of return". In the unlikely event that one does his (post-assassination) successor will reverse the decision.

--The wider Muslim world will never accede to a Jewish enclave in the heart of what they regard as Dar ul Islam.

Under the circumstances I do not see how peace is possible so long as Israel exists. Since I do not expect the Israelis, or the wider Jewish community, to give up without a fight it looks as if this long and bitter war still has a way to go. It may yet end in a nuclear conflagration.

I write this post with the sole intention of introducing a note of reality after reading Singer's fantasy. I shall NOT debate the rights and wrongs of the situation.
Posted by stevenlmeyer, Monday, 15 February 2010 9:46:42 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
<<What agreements are you referring to?>>

How about the Green line for starters. UN security council resolution 242.

<<The borders laid out under the Mandate provided for the Jewish National Home to be reconstituted in the land west of the Jordan River which includes the West Bank and Gaza and today's Israel.>>

Not true but even if it was it is still theft of land belonging to someone else.

<<My proposal calls for sovereignty in the major part of "Samaria and Judea" to be ceded to Jordan and for not one Arab or Jew to leave his current home.
No ethnic cleansing, no genocide.>>

Then why not just give them a state? Why the pleading to Jordan to take them? They dont want to join Jordan and Jordan does not want them. Why not give the sovereignty over "Judea and Samaria" to the people who actually desire it and currently live there?

<<Because the West Bank was part of Jordan between 1948-1967 and the West Bank Arabs were Jordanian citizens until 1988.>>

The same logic is used to justify the removal of the state of Israel and the repatriation of the Jews to their countries of origin. After all before 1948 there were no Israelis.

<<West Bank Arabs will again become Jordanian citizens and be liberated - not oppressed - by Jordan.>>

The same as the Jews will again become German and Russian citizens and be liberated - not - oppressed by their former homelands.
Yeah right Singer and the fairies in the bottom of my garden are waving at the pigs flying overhead.

<<What they want was attainable between 1948-1967 but no longer possible in 2010. There has to be another solution>>

Yeah Israel must return to its internationally recognised borders, set those borders within its constitution forevermore, remove settlements from Palestinian land, return water and other resources to the Palestinians, cease the siege of Gaza, join the IAEA, cease using stolen/illegally obtained passports by mossad, cease government sponsored assassination, share Jerusalem, release political prisoners, normalise relations with your neighbors and the world and stop calling us Goyim!
Posted by mikk, Tuesday, 16 February 2010 10:26:41 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
mikk:

For the reasons I set out in my first post, peace is impossible. For better or worse this appears to be a fight to the death. The most likely end point is a nuclear conflagration.

However, to address your specific point, you wrote:

"Yeah Israel must return to its internationally recognised borders,…."

What are Israel's "internationally recognised" borders?

And who would recognise them?

Most Muslims, 20% of humanity, refuse outright to accept the legitimacy of a Jewish State in Dar ul Islam. Many, perhaps most, OLO posters, as well as many other people throughout the world, agree with them. They regard the whole of Israel as stolen land.

From this point of view Israel has no "internationally recognised" borders.

The governments of Israel's neighbours accept Israel's existence because, for now, they are powerless to do anything about it. Few doubt that given the opportunity Israel's neighbour would attempt "regime change" in Israel.

I know no Israelis who believe Israel would be permitted to live in peace if it retreated to its 1967 borders or even its 1948 borders. After all they weren't left in peace in 1948 or 1967.

Most Israelis believe themselves to be in a situation of "I'm damned if I do and I'm damned if I don't".

Under those circumstances I do not see how peace is possible.

Note mikk that I am merely describing the situation as I see it. I am NOT going to debate the rights and wrongs.
Posted by stevenlmeyer, Tuesday, 16 February 2010 2:03:42 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
#stevenlmeyer

What you regard as my "fantasy" involving Jordan's re-entry to the West Bank and its division between Israel and Jordan still remains the only possible solution to avoiding what you yourself are predicting - more war and possible nuclear conflagration.

Given your scenario the Quartet is seeing the same danger with the collapse of the two-state solution. In those circumstances pressure must be applied to Abdullah as he holds the key to avoiding such conflict. Jordan - 78% of Mandate Palestine - is the circuit breaker and Abdullah must be subjected to enormous international pressure in the form of financial incentives and security guarantees for Jordan to resume its role in the West Bank where it left off in 1967.

If he fails to come to the party then the future is indeed gloomy.

Referring to my possible smoking habits belittles your thoughtful contributions. Pity that you could not resist the temptation to attack the messenger. You will gain much greater credibility if you can resist the temptation to do so in the future.
Posted by david singer, Wednesday, 17 February 2010 9:13:33 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Mikk

1. You said Israel did not honour agreements made "in the 40's and 50's". Resolution 242 was passed in 1967.

I ask again - what agreements are you referring to?

The Green Line is an armistice line not an international boundary.

2. Turkey's sovereignty of "Palestine" for 400 years was ended when the Mandate was established in Palestine for the reconstitution of the Jewish National Home on 0.001% of the former Ottoman Empire. The other 99.999% was given to enable Arab self-determination to occur.

The land belonged to Turkey and was taken away from Turkey by unanimous approval of the League of Nations. You call it "theft". I call it the consequences to the loser of a war.

3. A State was offered to the Palestinian Authority in 2000 and 2008 by Israel and rejected.

Given such a state was rejected on even a much larger area in 1937 and 1947 and was available in all the West Bank and Gaza between 1948-1967 when not one Jew lived there, I think it is fair to say any hope of a state emerging by negotiation is not going to happen.

4. You draw some strange conclusions from my proposal that does not involve any West Bank Arab having to leave his home and move anywhere else nor the destruction of any existing member State of the United Nations.

5. Considering the overwhelming population of Jordan are originally from West of the Jordan River, it is difficult to see how reunification of part of the West Bank with the East Bank will result in oppression. The West Bankers certainly were happy to be part of Jordan between 1948-1967.

6. Israel can't return to its internationally recognized borders because there are none - only armistice lines as referred to in 1 above because the Arab States refused to sit down, negotiate and define the borders between them and the Jewish State after the 1948 War.

7. The West Bank is not Palestinian land. It is disputed territory comprising about 5% of the Mandate remaining unallocated between Jews and Arabs.
Posted by david singer, Wednesday, 17 February 2010 9:30:51 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy